Logjam of college players - LA Times article - Will likely create higher level of talent in D2/3

@ABSORBER posted:

The NCAA granted an extra year to ALL spring sports student-athletes, not just seniors. This includes players in the Ivy League. So no, the Ivy did NOT exercise an option to NOT grant an additional year to seniors. In fact, the Ivy League took NO ACTION at all, which means their rule barring graduate students from participating in sports remains the same. 

So yes, ALL Ivy student-athletes (spring) have an extra year of eligibility. But if they happened to graduate then they are no longer eligible to play on an Ivy sports team. They have to use their extra year of eligibility elsewhere. No different than previous years.

@adbono posted:

Yes, so you see, national sports writers (media), don't know what they are talking about either. They are no different than some posters on this board.

The Ivy League (or any other conference for that matter) doesn't dictate (confer) NCAA eligibility. Only the NCAA does that. There are plenty of Ivy graduate students in the past who used their last year of eligibility playing at a different school as graduate transfer students. The Ivy League is simply saying you still only get 4 years of eligibility to play an Ivy sport. So just because you still have 4 years of eligibility after you had your freshman season cut short, you still only have 3 years remaining to play on an Ivy team. You are free to use that extra year of eligibility the NCAA granted you somewhere else. That is, of course, why so many Ivy League graduates are in the transfer portal.

So while the Ivy League may have made an "announcement", they were simply restating, or reemphasizing for the general public, their existing rule.

D1 college coaches are likely to have the best roster options in years. For college baseball fans the game will probably be better than it’s ever been. But in the process of this occurring a lot of kids are going to get screwed.

Who cares about roster expansion other than giving a dedicated, senior role player a uniform? What freshman wants to come in and be player #40 on the roster? You don’t want to come in under any circumstances being beyond player #20. Players 21-35 are likely to transfer after a year, or two if they convince themselves things might change hanging around for soph year. What would be different about players 36-45? All expanded rosters do is help coaches to hoard players before they screw them.

If I were a high school kid right now I would be thinking if I’m not a pro prospect what’s the best D3 academic/baseball situation I can find? A friend’s son played on a D3 national champion. The dog pile looked just as fun as the one in Omaha. The kid (now 32) is a Wall Street investment banker making a lot more than most former D1 pro prospects.,

@RJM posted:

D1 college coaches are likely to have the best roster options in years. For college baseball fans the game will probably be better than its ever been. But in the process of this occurring a lot of kids are going to get screwed.

Who cares about roster expansion other than giving a dedicated, senior role player a uniform? What freshman wants to come in and be player #40 on the roster. You don’t want to come in under any circumstances being beyond player #20. Players 21-35 are likely to transfer after a year, or two if they convince themselves things might change hanging around for soph year. What would be different about players 36-45? All expanded rosters do is help coaches to hoard players before they screw them.

If I were a high school kid right now I would be thinking if I’m not a pro prospect what’s the best D3 academic/baseball situation I can find? A friend’s son played on a D3 national champion. The dog pile looked just as fun as the one in Omaha. The kid (now 32) is a Wall Street investment banker making a lot more than most former D1 pro prospects.,

I’m amazed at how many people don’t think like this. Seems like some parents and players would rather be on the low end of a 15+ player recruiting class at a P5

@TerribleBPthrower posted:

I’m amazed at how many people don’t think like this. Seems like some parents and players would rather be on the low end of a 15+ player recruiting class at a P5

Couldn’t agree more. The likelihood of a college player being a legit MLB prospect is minuscule. And even if you have MLB potential there is always the risk of injury and other factors beyond your control. The emphasis should always be on academics. The reality is that if a player is good enough to play in the SEC, ACC, top half of the Big12, or a handful of other baseball crazy schools that’s a once in a lifetime experience that’s hard to pass up. Those schools offer a combination of high level competition AND rabid fan bases that make them special. There is nothing like playing every game in front of 5000 plus fans. But beyond that, I agree with RJM that you are way better off playing HA D3 than you are playing in a low level D1 Conference that isn’t HA. 

@smokeminside posted:

Hoping for a more thorough conversation about how the logjam will affect the high academic D3s, Ivy's, and other schools with hyper competitive admission rates.  

Will all colleges feel that same talent movement, or are those very high academic schools going to experience the "logjam" differently?

Using PedalDad's list as a starting point:

1.) The Ivy's exercised their option to NOT grant an additional year to seniors.   This creates no increase in roster size without NCAA changing the rules.  But it is interesting to note how difficult it is to hang up the cleats, as most of the graduating players from the Ivy's and other high academics (like Wofford) are seeking places to play given the additional year of eligibility -- We've covered that.   No material Ivy policy changes.  Although I believe a lot of the Ivy graduates that went into the portal are just putting placeholders in there to keep their eligibility options open.  By last count there were 40 Ivy players in the portal.  Yes there are a few very talented Ivy players, but I don't think you'll see many have a major impact playing as graduates at the same D1 level or higher D1 levels.

2.). D3's, like the Ivy's, offer no athletic aid.  some might think this would cause their rosters to be more fluid, but in actuality they are more stable.  This is likely because the bulk of their players are students first and athletes second. -- Agreed.  Ivy rosters will be more stable than other D1 rosters  but it is all relative.   You may see an influx of JUCO transfers (more than prior years) to Ivy programs that allow it.   Ivy/Patriot/D3 HA rosters are inherently stable, and most players that come in as freshmen leave as seniors.   This isn't the case with traditional D1 schools.   For me, it is going to be interesting to see how many D1 transfers wind up at D3 HA schools, and if there is any impact now or in the near future.   The limiting factor is going to be academics.   People that recognize an opportunity to leverage their academics to transfer into a D3 HA may be in a good spot...it is another option for these people.

3.) Expanding on the items above.  Academics was the first requirement to get into to these schools, not baseball skill.   It is just the opposite at baseball competitive D1, D2, and JUCO programs.  -- Academics is the first requirement but baseball is the "ticket" to more options.   As the saying goes...you're only as good as your options. In this case, it is both.   Transferring to another school can be easier if you are an athlete because a coach is championing you just as he/she is with freshmen recruiting admissions.

Just my thoughts on the topic.   The future is pretty cloudy for traditional D1s when it comes to college baseball and recruiting but I think it is less so with the HA D3s, Ivy and Patriot League schools.  They will be effected too, but just to a much lesser degree because of academics thresholds.   As I mentioned in another thread, if my son were being recruited today (not 10 years) ago, we would have probably just focused on HA, Patriot, and Ivy schools and not looked at D1 Mid-Majors because his focus was academic/engineering.

JMO.

@Gunner Mack Jr. posted:

I posted Prof Galloway's article on another thread earlier but the link below is a 2 min interview and its the same as the article I posted and gets right to the point.  It basically says top tier schools will be ok but many colleges are in real economic trouble and will close.  What he says about the future of education clearly has a huge impact on the future of sports at colleges.   I suspect he's a bit overhyping the situation but this is worth a quick listen.   

How this bleeds down into D3 sports is a good question but I think the post above by pedaldad is a logical one.  I would also say PitchingFan & adbono were way early in discussing the impacts of Covid, the extra year of eligibility and smaller draft on college ball.  I appreciate their insights.  I think my son is somewhat protected by playing high academic D3 and all seniors at the school he is joining moved on but whether D3 or not it's always going to be a battle to see the field.

* watch Part 2 (watch it all of course but I am referencing part 2)

https://twitter.com/profgallow...874000670855169?s=20

Thanks Gunner that was very interesting.  Probably a topic for another thread, but I wonder to what extent the pandemic will affect merit and other financial aid.

Qhead -  Top schools with big waiting lists and big endowments will likely be able to operate as they have been in all aspects.   I have to believe that as soon as you get to schools with limited/no waitlists and small endowments they will not be in a position to offer aid or they will decide to cut money losing sports in order to offer aid but that move will impact enrollments.    There are a lot of schools in between these extremes too - cutting adjunct professors, pay freezes and pay cuts etc.   A lot of different solutions will be coming in the next few years and each school will have a different slice I suspect.   Its a minefield for anyone looking to play ball or even select a college.

@RJM posted:

If I were a high school kid right now I would be thinking if I’m not a pro prospect what’s the best D3 academic/baseball situation I can find? A friend’s son played on a D3 national champion. The dog pile looked just as fun as the one in Omaha. The kid (now 32) is a Wall Street investment banker making a lot more than most former D1 pro prospects.,

The vast majority of kids and parents of HS BB players that I have run into do not think like this. They would rather go to a D1 JUCO than a D3. It is often because they do not have the academic chops to give them the HA option(s), but I am often mystified seeing relatively well educated parents pour tens of thousands of dollars into baseball training their son, but not a nickel for tutoring. The players who seem to benefit most from the HA route appear to be players who come from private schools. There, both the parent and the school are of one mind in using sports to leverage their way in to the best possible academic situation.

“Can you imagine your son getting a call in July — after they’ve been committed to a school for three years and signed a national letter of intent back in November — that not only do they not have a scholarship but they don’t have a spot on that team?”

I’m surprised they haven’t been called out on the statement above that is factually incorrect. Once a prospect has signed the NLI, their scholarship is guaranteed for that year. So, while a coach can say there isn’t a spot on his team (and many will want to leave and play ball elsewhere), they can’t say they don’t have a scholarship for that freshman year.

Also, while more players will be confronted with this situation this year then most, it is a regular occurrence with many P5 and P5-wannabe schools every year. Anybody entering that environment cannot honestly claim to be surprised.

@57special posted:

The vast majority of kids and parents of HS BB players that I have run into do not think like this. They would rather go to a D1 JUCO than a D3. It is often because they do not have the academic chops to give them the HA option(s), but I am often mystified seeing relatively well educated parents pour tens of thousands of dollars into baseball training their son, but not a nickel for tutoring. The players who seem to benefit most from the HA route appear to be players who come from private schools. There, both the parent and the school are of one mind in using sports to leverage their way in to the best possible academic situation.

   

This is certainly how we've approached it from the start.  4/40.  Still holds true. 

So-FLA Dad, when it come to roster cuts lots of coaches will say almost anything to get what they want. Comments are often not confined to what is factually correct regarding scholarships and NLIs. Also most 18 yr old HS seniors are intimidated by college baseball coaches and aren’t likely to question or challenge a coach in the midst of a conversation that is already a huge disappointment to them. 

@SoFla-Dad posted:

“Can you imagine your son getting a call in July — after they’ve been committed to a school for three years and signed a national letter of intent back in November — that not only do they not have a scholarship but they don’t have a spot on that team?”

I’m surprised they haven’t been called out on the statement above that is factually incorrect. Once a prospect has signed the NLI, their scholarship is guaranteed for that year. So, while a coach can say there isn’t a spot on his team (and many will want to leave and play ball elsewhere), they can’t say they don’t have a scholarship for that freshman year.

Also, while more players will be confronted with this situation this year then most, it is a regular occurrence with many P5 and P5-wannabe schools every year. Anybody entering that environment cannot honestly claim to be surprised.

Agreed - actually I'm chuckling a bit because I'm wondering if that was a bit of a "Freudian slip" by the coach revealing that he does not really deem an NLI to be binding on the program (although certainly binding on the student athlete) LOL!  Nothing against this coach personally and I'm not suggesting this is how he views the NLI -- just suggesting that this might be telling....   Once again my "pro labor" bias is showing!  Solidarność"

But as we have said, why would you go or send your kid to a school that does not want your kid?  He has to have a scholarship but the school does not have to do anything baseball related with the kid other than keep him from playing anywhere else if he pushes the issue.   The coach is nicely saying, "no room at the inn."  You can either force your way in the door and be shunned by probably the entire baseball community or move on to find another inn that does have room.  Whether he is legally right or wrong is not the issue.  He does not have room in his plans for the kid and is saying it is not going to happen at his school.  I know there are players and parents who think they can convince the coach but I'm willing to bet the coach will win in 99% of the cases.  The coach will not let the kid anywhere near the baseball facilities and probably tell all of his baseball coach friends that the kid tried to push his way in.  Then the kid gets blackballed everywhere.  What other coach wants a kid who thinks they can tell you what they are gonna do?

I understand the practical reality that's been discussed here many times.  Sorry I got the thread off track.  But at least to me, the question of whether the coach "is legally right or wrong" IS an issue.  The NLI should be bind both parties equally.  Why else bother with it?  That's not the way it works and it's not going to change.  At least the coach quoted in the LA Times article (perhaps unwittingly) kind of fessed up to it LOL.

@PitchingFan posted:

But as we have said, why would you go or send your kid to a school that does not want your kid?  He has to have a scholarship but the school does not have to do anything baseball related with the kid other than keep him from playing anywhere else if he pushes the issue.   The coach is nicely saying, "no room at the inn."  You can either force your way in the door and be shunned by probably the entire baseball community or move on to find another inn that does have room.  Whether he is legally right or wrong is not the issue.  He does not have room in his plans for the kid and is saying it is not going to happen at his school.  I know there are players and parents who think they can convince the coach but I'm willing to bet the coach will win in 99% of the cases.  The coach will not let the kid anywhere near the baseball facilities and probably tell all of his baseball coach friends that the kid tried to push his way in.  Then the kid gets blackballed everywhere.  What other coach wants a kid who thinks they can tell you what they are gonna do?

You are correct, A kid with this mindset has no business going to that school. Who cares that the head coach of the school just had you sign an NLI for a 50% athletic scholarship this past November? You have no business being there because the coach doesn't want you anymore because of a pandemic and he's playing for one season at a time. So go ahead and try to find another school at this late hour because you are so laser-focused on baseball you definitely need to play at any community college willing to give you a tryout next fall. Because you will surely play in the MLB one day.

Or maybe you signed that NLI because that's the school you want to get an education from and that's why you turned down other offers and why it's the only school in which you applied. Maybe you should take that money that the coach committed to when he thought you were worth it six months ago. Let him eat it. Because he certainly deserves it.

The guy quoted is someone making a statement to help influence the NCAA into increasing the 11.7/27 next season. He knows the agreement is legally binding and when the push comes to shove, the NLI wins. He wants the families of those incoming freshman to help apply some pressure on the NCAA. He's willing to "bend" the truth a bit to get people riled up.

@ABSORBER posted:

The NCAA granted an extra year to ALL spring sports student-athletes, not just seniors. This includes players in the Ivy League. So no, the Ivy did NOT exercise an option to NOT grant an additional year to seniors. In fact, the Ivy League took NO ACTION at all, which means their rule barring graduate students from participating in sports remains the same. 

So yes, ALL Ivy student-athletes (spring) have an extra year of eligibility. But if they happened to graduate then they are no longer eligible to play on an Ivy sports team. They have to use their extra year of eligibility elsewhere. No different than previous years.the Ivy's 

Seems like circular logic to me.  The Ivy's taking no action is the definition of choosing not to exercise an option.   Didn't need an Ivy education to teach me that.

@ABSORBER posted:

You are correct, A kid with this mindset has no business going to that school. Who cares that the head coach of the school just had you sign an NLI for a 50% athletic scholarship this past November? You have no business being there because the coach doesn't want you anymore because of a pandemic and he's playing for one season at a time. So go ahead and try to find another school at this late hour because you are so laser-focused on baseball you definitely need to play at any community college willing to give you a tryout next fall. Because you will surely play in the MLB one day.

Or maybe you signed that NLI because that's the school you want to get an education from and that's why you turned down other offers and why it's the only school in which you applied. Maybe you should take that money that the coach committed to when he thought you were worth it six months ago. Let him eat it. Because he certainly deserves it.

“You can drive a car with your feet if you want to. That don’t make it a good f*****g idea!”

- Chris Rock 

@ABSORBER posted:

The guy quoted is someone making a statement to help influence the NCAA into increasing the 11.7/27 next season. He knows the agreement is legally binding and when the push comes to shove, the NLI wins. He wants the families of those incoming freshman to help apply some pressure on the NCAA. He's willing to "bend" the truth a bit to get people riled up.

Why not, if it makes the situation better?

Don't see anything wrong with wanting the NCAA to adjust/increase the 11.7/27 rule.  It helps teams, coaches, and players at minimal extra cost to schools.  This takes away pitting a freshman with a signed NLI against a returning proven upperclassmen.

Remember, we are talking about athletes' education, but also coaches' livelihood.  It is a different world in Ivy's, Patriot, HA D3 leagues where coaches don't have typical pressure of on-field success to keep their jobs.  Heck, 3 of the 8 Ivy coaches have been there for between 22  to 30 years.  The best winning percentage among them is right at 50%, and that is the best in the conference.

In places where coaches need to win to keep their job, it is going to be different.  Gary Gilmore has been the head coach at Coastal for 25 years because he wins.  Mike Sansing has been the head coach at Kennesaw because he wins.  If they weren't winning consistently, they get replaced quickly.

So why is it wrong for someone to support reducing the burden put on coaches and players.  If all 35 positions could have funding, there would be no question about who is really on the team and who isn't.  If the Ivy's don't grant any athletic scholarships with their ridiculous endowments and Georgetown only wants to grant 5 baseball scholarships with their $1.7 billion endowment, so what.